Respected Chairman (CCSAP),
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
Instead of new big industries all industries, which existed prior to merger in telangana, were closed or sold to Andhra capitalists.
1) Nizam Sugar factory, Nizamabad
2) Republic forge Hyderabad
3 Ajamjahi mills Warangal
4 DBR Mills
5) AP Scooters
6) Alwyn metals
7) IDPL
8) HMT etc
They are planning to sell land belonging to these industries to fund their and their constituency progress.
That is why we want our Rule.
Jai Telangana.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
srikrishna committee day 7
Respected Chairman (CCSAP),
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
The hype about united Andhra is mostly related to Hyderabad, since most of pro-united people from Andhra own real estate property in and around Hyderabad.
Please propose to them, while discussing the issue, that, will they have any objection if telangana separated without Hyderabad, they all will agree. Every one interested about their own properties in Hyderabad, no one cares about rest of telangana.
That is why we want our Rule.
Jai Telangana.
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
The hype about united Andhra is mostly related to Hyderabad, since most of pro-united people from Andhra own real estate property in and around Hyderabad.
Please propose to them, while discussing the issue, that, will they have any objection if telangana separated without Hyderabad, they all will agree. Every one interested about their own properties in Hyderabad, no one cares about rest of telangana.
That is why we want our Rule.
Jai Telangana.
Friday, February 26, 2010
srikrishna committee day 6
Respected Chairman (CCSAP),
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
You can see the height of shamelessness in the acts of our beloved chief ministers for last 20 years.
Mr. Naidu and Mr. reddy both developed their constituencies by funding the money received from the sale accounts of lands in Hyderabad.
Both hold one university in each constituency.
The funds received by all universities in telangana are lesser then the funds received by Vemana University of ys reddy district.
In 2009-2010 Telangana university received Rs 10 crores where as YS Reddy constituency received Rs 100 crores for development.
The govt sold around Rs 10000 crore lands around Hyderabad to fund all development activity in Andhra.
Why the Bangalore and South destined roads in Hyderabad were chosen to develop IT, hardware and airport corridors? Because both chief ministers are from Rayalseenma. Due to their muscle and money power no one from so called telangana leaders dared to question them.
That is why we want our Rule.
Jai Telangana.
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
You can see the height of shamelessness in the acts of our beloved chief ministers for last 20 years.
Mr. Naidu and Mr. reddy both developed their constituencies by funding the money received from the sale accounts of lands in Hyderabad.
Both hold one university in each constituency.
The funds received by all universities in telangana are lesser then the funds received by Vemana University of ys reddy district.
In 2009-2010 Telangana university received Rs 10 crores where as YS Reddy constituency received Rs 100 crores for development.
The govt sold around Rs 10000 crore lands around Hyderabad to fund all development activity in Andhra.
Why the Bangalore and South destined roads in Hyderabad were chosen to develop IT, hardware and airport corridors? Because both chief ministers are from Rayalseenma. Due to their muscle and money power no one from so called telangana leaders dared to question them.
That is why we want our Rule.
Jai Telangana.
Thursday, February 25, 2010
srikrishna committee day 5
Respected Chairman (CCSAP),
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
We did have maintained harmonious life with Muslims, Marathas and kanndigas under Hyderabad State without any problem. Hyderabad is the center of all Indian languages and cross cultures. All states people lived hear for 100’s of years.
Once forced merger under the guise of language is completed, cheat and faction minded people started exploiting us.
We (Telangana People) are plain, peace-loving people can’t adjust with cheating costal and faction led rayalaseema people. We want our own rule.
Jai Telangana.
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
We did have maintained harmonious life with Muslims, Marathas and kanndigas under Hyderabad State without any problem. Hyderabad is the center of all Indian languages and cross cultures. All states people lived hear for 100’s of years.
Once forced merger under the guise of language is completed, cheat and faction minded people started exploiting us.
We (Telangana People) are plain, peace-loving people can’t adjust with cheating costal and faction led rayalaseema people. We want our own rule.
Jai Telangana.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
srikrishna committee day 4
Respected Chairman (CCSAP),
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
Please find out how many telangana students got admission into Central University of Hyderabad (It is the result of separate state struggle) from its opening untill now, in general category and specially in Schedule cast reservations.
Results will surprise every one.(All most all telugu students from Andhra)
I agree there are no local reservations for central universities, but the fact is proper education and competitiveness not imparted to telangana students for the last 50 years.
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
Please find out how many telangana students got admission into Central University of Hyderabad (It is the result of separate state struggle) from its opening untill now, in general category and specially in Schedule cast reservations.
Results will surprise every one.(All most all telugu students from Andhra)
I agree there are no local reservations for central universities, but the fact is proper education and competitiveness not imparted to telangana students for the last 50 years.
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
srikrishna committee day 3
Respected Chairman (CCSAP),
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
Please find out how many government employees working in telangana whose origin is in Andhra and in Andhra who hails from telangana?
There is minimal % in Andhara those also above rank of officers, the main reason is straight forwardness of telanganites and manipulative, unfaithful Andhrites shamelessness and, cunningness.
We do want our own rule and respect, we don’t want to be ruled by selfish. We don’t want live along with ruthless people. We don’t want to be associated with them under Telugu speaking banner as they are cheaters and world looks at them as scam artists and fake people with no morals (Krishi subba rao, GP Punna rao, Satyam raju, Euro lottery winner from vijaywada etc., )
Jai Telangana
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
Please find out how many government employees working in telangana whose origin is in Andhra and in Andhra who hails from telangana?
There is minimal % in Andhara those also above rank of officers, the main reason is straight forwardness of telanganites and manipulative, unfaithful Andhrites shamelessness and, cunningness.
We do want our own rule and respect, we don’t want to be ruled by selfish. We don’t want live along with ruthless people. We don’t want to be associated with them under Telugu speaking banner as they are cheaters and world looks at them as scam artists and fake people with no morals (Krishi subba rao, GP Punna rao, Satyam raju, Euro lottery winner from vijaywada etc., )
Jai Telangana
Amar Singh on telangana
Terming the Terms of Reference of the Justice Srikrishna Committee on Telangana as a "joke", Singh said the the document only reflected the Centre's policy of "management by postponement."
"They only see the protests against Telangana and not the support," he said.
"They only see the protests against Telangana and not the support," he said.
Monday, February 22, 2010
srikrishna committee day 1
Respected Chairman (CCSAP),
There is a need of bifurcating the Andhra Pradesh State and forming the Telangana State with immediate effect to stop neo colonization of Telangana by andhrites for following reasons.
Though living in Telangana for several years the Andhra affluence maintained their cultural difference with us claiming the superiority. For example.
In Nizamabad district along the belt of Nizamsagar irrigation canal there are several Andhra farmers settlements created near telangana villages by same name, which they call camps. For example, there is ETHONDA village, and a Cmp of andhrites sprouted with the name ETHONDA CAMP .The village and camp are totally two different worlds having separate cultural, social, economical disparity. Having such satellite camps by Andhra farmers is the common special character for telangana villages wherever there is water resource. They never mingled with natives nor respected local’s innocence and made fun of our language and living conditions. They always concentrated on self-development but never bothered to uplift the village from whose resources they are getting richer.
They purely came to telangana to get richer by utilizing the telangana lands and resources to the full extent. All gains were repatriated to their original coastal districts.
They have created Neo ANDHRA colonies in Telanagana and exploiting our resources exporting the same to their places just like what British did with India.
We do want our own rule and respect ,we don't want to be ruled by selfish neo colonizers.
Jai Telangana.
There is a need of bifurcating the Andhra Pradesh State and forming the Telangana State with immediate effect to stop neo colonization of Telangana by andhrites for following reasons.
Though living in Telangana for several years the Andhra affluence maintained their cultural difference with us claiming the superiority. For example.
In Nizamabad district along the belt of Nizamsagar irrigation canal there are several Andhra farmers settlements created near telangana villages by same name, which they call camps. For example, there is ETHONDA village, and a Cmp of andhrites sprouted with the name ETHONDA CAMP .The village and camp are totally two different worlds having separate cultural, social, economical disparity. Having such satellite camps by Andhra farmers is the common special character for telangana villages wherever there is water resource. They never mingled with natives nor respected local’s innocence and made fun of our language and living conditions. They always concentrated on self-development but never bothered to uplift the village from whose resources they are getting richer.
They purely came to telangana to get richer by utilizing the telangana lands and resources to the full extent. All gains were repatriated to their original coastal districts.
They have created Neo ANDHRA colonies in Telanagana and exploiting our resources exporting the same to their places just like what British did with India.
We do want our own rule and respect ,we don't want to be ruled by selfish neo colonizers.
Jai Telangana.
srikrishna committee day 2
Respected Chairman (CCSAP),
Please find out how come there are several public representatives (MLA’s, MP”s and all political party leaders with power) in telangana ,whose origin is in Andhra and none in Andhra who hails from telangana?
Jai Telangana.
Please find out how come there are several public representatives (MLA’s, MP”s and all political party leaders with power) in telangana ,whose origin is in Andhra and none in Andhra who hails from telangana?
Jai Telangana.
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Sirpuram Yadaiah
Sirpuram Yadaiah, a 10th class student, set himself on fire and ran towards the Osmania University Arts College raising slogans in support of Telangana, sending the police and fellow agitators in a tizzy. As he began running as a ball of fire, the policemen, acted swiftly and doused the blaze by pouring water. Yadaiah, a resident of neighbouring Ranga Reddy district, had come to the city to participate in the rally. — PTI
అపోలో ఆస్పత్రిలో చికిత్స పొందుతూ యాదయ్య మృతి
హైదరాబాద్, ఫిబ్రవరి 21 : తెలంగాణ కోసం ఆత్మాహుతి చేసుకున్న యాదయ్య డీఆర్డిఏ అపోలో ఆస్పత్రిలో చికిత్స పొదుతూ శనివారం ఆర్ధరాత్రి దాటిన తర్వాత మృతి చెందాడు.
ఓయూ విద్యార్థి జేఏసీ అసెంబ్లీ ముట్టడి సందర్భంగా శనివారం ఉస్మానియా వర్శిటీలో యాదయ్య ఒంటిపై కిరోసిన్ పోసుకుని ఆత్మహత్యాయత్నం చేసిన విషయం విదితమే. తెలంగాణ కోసం ఆత్మాహుతి చేసుకున్న యాదయ్య అంత్యక్రియలు ఆదివారం రంగారెడ్డిజిల్లా, మహేశ్వరం మండలం, నాగారంలో ఉద్రిక్తల నడుమ పూర్తిచేశారు.
Friday, February 19, 2010
చిరంజీవిపై చీటింగ్ కేసు Andhra Jyothy 02/18/2010
చిరంజీవిపై చీటింగ్ కేసు
ఇబ్రహీంపట్నం కోర్టు ఆదేశాలుప్రజారాజ్యం పార్టీ అధ్యక్షుడు చిరంజీవిపై గురువారం చీటింగ్ కేసు నమోదైంది. గత అసెంబ్లీ ఎన్నికల సందర్భంగా తెలంగాణ ఇస్తామని చెప్పి, తీరా ఎన్నికల తర్వాత మాట మార్చి ప్రజల్ని మోసం చేశారంటూ చెలమారెడ్డి అనే వ్యక్తి చిరంజీవిపై ఇబ్రహీంపట్నం కోర్టులో పిటిషన్ దాఖలు చేశారు. ప్రజారాజ్యం పార్టీ తెలంగాణలో కూడా సీట్లు సాధించినందున చిరంజీవిపై చర్య తీసుకోవాలని ఫిర్యాదీ కోర్టులో దాఖలు పిటిషన్లో విజ్ఞప్తి చేశారు. దీనితో కోర్టు చిరంజీవిపై చిరంజీవిపై చీటింగ్ కేసు నమోదు చేయమని పోలీసులను ఆదేశించింది.
ఇబ్రహీంపట్నం కోర్టు ఆదేశాలుప్రజారాజ్యం పార్టీ అధ్యక్షుడు చిరంజీవిపై గురువారం చీటింగ్ కేసు నమోదైంది. గత అసెంబ్లీ ఎన్నికల సందర్భంగా తెలంగాణ ఇస్తామని చెప్పి, తీరా ఎన్నికల తర్వాత మాట మార్చి ప్రజల్ని మోసం చేశారంటూ చెలమారెడ్డి అనే వ్యక్తి చిరంజీవిపై ఇబ్రహీంపట్నం కోర్టులో పిటిషన్ దాఖలు చేశారు. ప్రజారాజ్యం పార్టీ తెలంగాణలో కూడా సీట్లు సాధించినందున చిరంజీవిపై చర్య తీసుకోవాలని ఫిర్యాదీ కోర్టులో దాఖలు పిటిషన్లో విజ్ఞప్తి చేశారు. దీనితో కోర్టు చిరంజీవిపై చిరంజీవిపై చీటింగ్ కేసు నమోదు చేయమని పోలీసులను ఆదేశించింది.
Saturday, February 13, 2010
జస్టిస్ శ్రీకృష్ణ కమిటీ విధి విధానాలు
విధి విధానాలు
1. ప్రత్యేక తెలంగాణ, సమైక్యాంధ్ర డిమాండ్ల నేపథ్యంలో రాష్ట్రంలో నెలకొన్న పరిస్థితులను అధ్యయనం చేయడం.
2. ఆంధ్ర రాష్ట్ర ఆవిర్భావం నుంచీ సంభవించిన పరిణామాల సమీక్ష. రాష్ట్రంలో వివిధ ప్రాంతాల్లో సాధించిన ప్రగతి, అభివృద్ధిపై ఈ పరిణామాలు చూపిన ప్రభావాన్ని అధ్యయనం చేయడం.
3. రాష్ట్రంలోని వివిధ వర్గాల ప్రజలు, మహిళలు, పిల్లలు, విద్యార్థులు, మైనార్టీలు, ఇతర వెనుకబడిన వర్గాలు, షెడ్యూల్డు కులాలు తెగల ప్రజలపై ఇటీవలి పరిణామాలు చూపిన ప్రభావాన్ని అధ్యయనం చేయడం.
4. మొదటి మూడు విధివిధానాల్లో ప్రస్తావించిన అంశాలను పరిశీలించే సమయంలో పరిష్కరించాల్సిన కీలకాంశాలను గుర్తించటం.
5. పైన ప్రస్తావించిన అంశాలపై సమాజంలోని అన్ని వర్గాలు ముఖ్యంగా రాజకీయ పార్టీలతో సంప్రదింపులు జరపటం, వారి అభిప్రాయాలు తెలుసుకోవటం. రాష్ట్రంలో క్లిష్ట పరిస్థితులను పరిష్కరించుట, దీంతోపాటు అన్ని వర్గాల ప్రజల ప్రయోజనాలను కాపాడుతూ వారి సంక్షేమాన్ని పెంపొందించేందుకు తీసుకోవాల్సిన చర్యలు, వివిధ పరిష్కార మార్గాలను ఆయా రాజకీయ పార్టీలు, ఇతర సంస్థల నుంచి కోరటం. ఈ లక్ష్య సాధన కోసం అందరికీ ఆమోదయోగ్యమైన సర్వోత్తమ పరిష్కారాలను గుర్తించి, దీనికోసం కార్యచరణ ప్రణాళిక, రోడ్ మ్యాప్ను సిఫారసు చేయడం.
6. పైన ప్రస్తావించిన అంశాలపై పారిశ్రామిక, వాణిజ్య, కార్మిక, రైతుల సంఘాలు, మహిళా సంఘాలు, విద్యార్థి సంఘాలతో సంప్రదింపులు జరిపి వారి అభిప్రాయాలు తెలుసుకోవటం. రాష్ట్రంలోని అన్ని ప్రాంతాల సర్వతోముఖాభివృద్ధికి వారి అభిప్రాయాలను తెలుసుకొనడం.
7. కమిటీ తాను భావించే ఇతర సూచనలు, సిఫారసులు చేయుట.
కమిటీ తన నివేదికను కేంద్ర ప్రభుత్వానికి 2010 డిసెంబర్ 31లోగా అందజేయాల్సి ఉంటుంది.
కేసీఆర్ దీక్ష నుంచి విధి విధానాల వరకూ..
కేసీఆర్ దీక్ష నుంచి విధి విధానాల వరకూ..
AndhraJyothy 02/12/2010
హైదరాబాద్, ఫిబ్రవరి 12 (ఆన్లైన్) : నాలుగు నెలలుగా రాష్ట్రంలో జరుగుతున్న రాజకీయ పరిణామాలు జస్టిస్ శ్రీకృష్ణ కమిటీ విధి విధానాల ప్రకటనతో ఇప్పుడు కొత్త మలుపు తీసుకుంటున్నాయి. నవంబర్ చివరిలో కేసీఆర్ నిరాహార దీక్ష నిర్ణయం.. దాన్ని అడ్డుకుంటూ ఆయన్ను అరెస్టు చేసిన దగ్గర నుంచి.. రాజుకున్న ప్రత్యేక తెలంగాణ డిమాండ్. మధ్య మధ్యలో హోం మంత్రి చిదంబరం ప్రకటనలు.
అవి తెలంగాణ, సీమాంధ్ర నేతల్లో కలిగించిన ఆగ్రహావేశాలు. ఢిల్లీలో రాజకీయ పార్టీలతో సమావేశాలు.. రాష్ట్రంలో పరిస్థితుల అధ్యయనానికి కమిటీ ఏర్పాటు, విధి విధానాల ఖరారు వరకూ జరిగిన పరిణామాలెన్నో! ఆ కీలక పరిణామాలను ఒక సారి పరిశీలిస్తే....
ప్రత్యేక తెలంగాణ రాష్ట్రం కోసం సిద్దిపేటలో ఆమరణ నిరాహార దీక్షకు సిద్ధమైన కేసీఆర్.
నవంబర్ 29: రీంనగర్లో కేసీఆర్ అరెస్ట్, ఖమ్మం ఆస్పత్రికి తరలింపు, తెలంగాణలో ఒక్కసారిగా ఉద్రిక్త పరిణామాలు.
నవంబర్ 30: ఖమ్మం ఆస్పత్రిలో కేసీఆర్ దీక్ష భగ్నం, నిరశన కొనసాగుతోందని కేసీఆర్ వెల్లడి.
డిసెంబర్ 4: నిమ్స్లో విషమించిన కేసీఆర్ ఆరోగ్యం, ఇంటెన్సివ్ కేర్కు తరలింపు.
డిసెంబర్ 7: అఖిలపక్ష సమావేశం. తెలంగాణపై బిల్లు పెడితే మద్దతిస్తామన్న పార్టీలు.
డిసెంబర్ 9: తెలంగాణ ఏర్పాటు ప్రక్రియ ప్రారంభిస్తామన్న కేంద్ర హోం మంత్రి చిదంబరం, అసెంబ్లీలో తీర్మానం ప్రవేశపెట్టాలని ముఖ్యమంత్రి రోశయ్యకు సూచన. నిరాహార దీక్ష విరమించిన టీఆర్ఎస్ అధినేత కేసీఆర్.
డిసెంబర్ 10: రాష్ట్రంలో మారిన రాజకీయం. చిదంబరం ప్రకటనను వ్యతిరేకించిన సీమాంధ్ర నేతలు, మూకుమ్మడి రాజీనామాలు.
డిసెంబర్ 15: విజయవాడలో లగడపాటి దీక్ష.
డిసెంబర్ 21: హైదరాబాద్ నిమ్స్కు వచ్చిన లగడపాటి.
డిసెంబర్ 23: చిదంబరం మలి ప్రకటన. రాష్ట్రంలో రాజకీయ పార్టీలు భిన్న వైఖరులు తీసుకున్నాయని వెల్లడి, విస్తృత సంప్రదింపులు జరపాల్సిన అవసరం ఉందని వ్యాఖ్య. కమిటీ ఏర్పాటు చేస్తామని ప్రకటన.
డిసెంబర్ 24: చిదంబరం ప్రకటనపై తెలంగాణల్లో ఆగ్రహావేశాలు. బంద్లు, విధ్వంసాలు. కాంగ్రెస్, టీడీపీ, టీఆర్ఎస్, బీజేపీ, వివిధ తెలంగాణ ప్రజా సంఘాలు, సంస్థలతో జేఏసీ ఏర్పాటు యత్నాలు.
డిసెంబర్ 30: చిదంబరం మూడో ప్రకటన. జనవరి 5న ఢిల్లీకి రావాలని ఆంధ్రప్రదేశ్లోని ఎనిమిది గుర్తింపు పొందిన రాజకీయ పార్టీలకు పిలుపు.
జనవరి 5: ఢిల్లీలో హోం మంత్రితో 8 పార్టీల నేతల భేటీ. రాష్ట్రంలో పరిస్థితులు చక్కదిద్దాలని, ఆందోళనలకు స్వస్తి పలికి శాంతియుత వాతావరణం నెలకొనేలా చూడాలని అన్ని పార్టీల ఏకాభిప్రాయం. హేతుబద్ద వ్యవధిలోపు చర్చలకు అన్ని పార్టీలూ అంగీకరించాయి.
ఫిబ్రవరి 3: జస్టిస్ శ్రీకృష్ణ నేతృత్వంలో ఐదుగురు సభ్యుల కమిటీని ప్రకటించిన కేంద్రం. రాష్ట్రంలో పరిస్థితులపై ఈ కమిటీ అధ్యయనం చేస్తుందని వెల్లడి.
ఫిబ్రవరి 10: విధి విధానాలను ఆమోదించిన కాంగ్రెస్ కోర్ కమిటీ.
ఫిబ్రవరి 12: ఏడు అంశాలతో శ్రీకృష్ణ కమిటీకి విధి విధానాలు ప్రకటించిన కేంద్రం.
AndhraJyothy 02/12/2010
హైదరాబాద్, ఫిబ్రవరి 12 (ఆన్లైన్) : నాలుగు నెలలుగా రాష్ట్రంలో జరుగుతున్న రాజకీయ పరిణామాలు జస్టిస్ శ్రీకృష్ణ కమిటీ విధి విధానాల ప్రకటనతో ఇప్పుడు కొత్త మలుపు తీసుకుంటున్నాయి. నవంబర్ చివరిలో కేసీఆర్ నిరాహార దీక్ష నిర్ణయం.. దాన్ని అడ్డుకుంటూ ఆయన్ను అరెస్టు చేసిన దగ్గర నుంచి.. రాజుకున్న ప్రత్యేక తెలంగాణ డిమాండ్. మధ్య మధ్యలో హోం మంత్రి చిదంబరం ప్రకటనలు.
అవి తెలంగాణ, సీమాంధ్ర నేతల్లో కలిగించిన ఆగ్రహావేశాలు. ఢిల్లీలో రాజకీయ పార్టీలతో సమావేశాలు.. రాష్ట్రంలో పరిస్థితుల అధ్యయనానికి కమిటీ ఏర్పాటు, విధి విధానాల ఖరారు వరకూ జరిగిన పరిణామాలెన్నో! ఆ కీలక పరిణామాలను ఒక సారి పరిశీలిస్తే....
ప్రత్యేక తెలంగాణ రాష్ట్రం కోసం సిద్దిపేటలో ఆమరణ నిరాహార దీక్షకు సిద్ధమైన కేసీఆర్.
నవంబర్ 29: రీంనగర్లో కేసీఆర్ అరెస్ట్, ఖమ్మం ఆస్పత్రికి తరలింపు, తెలంగాణలో ఒక్కసారిగా ఉద్రిక్త పరిణామాలు.
నవంబర్ 30: ఖమ్మం ఆస్పత్రిలో కేసీఆర్ దీక్ష భగ్నం, నిరశన కొనసాగుతోందని కేసీఆర్ వెల్లడి.
డిసెంబర్ 4: నిమ్స్లో విషమించిన కేసీఆర్ ఆరోగ్యం, ఇంటెన్సివ్ కేర్కు తరలింపు.
డిసెంబర్ 7: అఖిలపక్ష సమావేశం. తెలంగాణపై బిల్లు పెడితే మద్దతిస్తామన్న పార్టీలు.
డిసెంబర్ 9: తెలంగాణ ఏర్పాటు ప్రక్రియ ప్రారంభిస్తామన్న కేంద్ర హోం మంత్రి చిదంబరం, అసెంబ్లీలో తీర్మానం ప్రవేశపెట్టాలని ముఖ్యమంత్రి రోశయ్యకు సూచన. నిరాహార దీక్ష విరమించిన టీఆర్ఎస్ అధినేత కేసీఆర్.
డిసెంబర్ 10: రాష్ట్రంలో మారిన రాజకీయం. చిదంబరం ప్రకటనను వ్యతిరేకించిన సీమాంధ్ర నేతలు, మూకుమ్మడి రాజీనామాలు.
డిసెంబర్ 15: విజయవాడలో లగడపాటి దీక్ష.
డిసెంబర్ 21: హైదరాబాద్ నిమ్స్కు వచ్చిన లగడపాటి.
డిసెంబర్ 23: చిదంబరం మలి ప్రకటన. రాష్ట్రంలో రాజకీయ పార్టీలు భిన్న వైఖరులు తీసుకున్నాయని వెల్లడి, విస్తృత సంప్రదింపులు జరపాల్సిన అవసరం ఉందని వ్యాఖ్య. కమిటీ ఏర్పాటు చేస్తామని ప్రకటన.
డిసెంబర్ 24: చిదంబరం ప్రకటనపై తెలంగాణల్లో ఆగ్రహావేశాలు. బంద్లు, విధ్వంసాలు. కాంగ్రెస్, టీడీపీ, టీఆర్ఎస్, బీజేపీ, వివిధ తెలంగాణ ప్రజా సంఘాలు, సంస్థలతో జేఏసీ ఏర్పాటు యత్నాలు.
డిసెంబర్ 30: చిదంబరం మూడో ప్రకటన. జనవరి 5న ఢిల్లీకి రావాలని ఆంధ్రప్రదేశ్లోని ఎనిమిది గుర్తింపు పొందిన రాజకీయ పార్టీలకు పిలుపు.
జనవరి 5: ఢిల్లీలో హోం మంత్రితో 8 పార్టీల నేతల భేటీ. రాష్ట్రంలో పరిస్థితులు చక్కదిద్దాలని, ఆందోళనలకు స్వస్తి పలికి శాంతియుత వాతావరణం నెలకొనేలా చూడాలని అన్ని పార్టీల ఏకాభిప్రాయం. హేతుబద్ద వ్యవధిలోపు చర్చలకు అన్ని పార్టీలూ అంగీకరించాయి.
ఫిబ్రవరి 3: జస్టిస్ శ్రీకృష్ణ నేతృత్వంలో ఐదుగురు సభ్యుల కమిటీని ప్రకటించిన కేంద్రం. రాష్ట్రంలో పరిస్థితులపై ఈ కమిటీ అధ్యయనం చేస్తుందని వెల్లడి.
ఫిబ్రవరి 10: విధి విధానాలను ఆమోదించిన కాంగ్రెస్ కోర్ కమిటీ.
ఫిబ్రవరి 12: ఏడు అంశాలతో శ్రీకృష్ణ కమిటీకి విధి విధానాలు ప్రకటించిన కేంద్రం.
Tuesday, February 02, 2010
Voice of Telangana - Memorandum to Home Minister
Sri. P. Chidambaram,
Home Minister,
Govt. of India,New Delhi.
Respected Home Minister,
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
Memorandum
The Chairman, ‘Voice of Telangana’ Hyderabad hereby submit this Memorandum on the issue of formation of Telangana state by bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh.
2. At the outset we convey our sincere thanks to you for holding a meeting of 8 Political parties of Andhra Pradesh on 5th January, 2010 to consider the issues underlying the demand for Telangana state. In this context we take this opportunity to put-forth our ‘demand’ for the formation of Telangana state by ‘bifurcation’ of Andhra Pradesh. In this connection we request you to kindly consider the facts and issues stated hereunder in support of our demand for ‘Telangana state’.
3. Telangana has 10 districts and about 4 crores people who constitute 41% of the total population of Andhra Pradesh. Its geographical area is 1.5 lakhs sq. km which is 42% of the total area of the state. Besides, Hyderabad, the 5th largest city in India, is a part of Telangana region. Another notable feature is that Telangana region is larger than FOURTEEN STATES in the country as described below:
(1) Haryana (2) Punjab (3) Himachal Pradesh (4) Goa (5) Manipur (6) Meghalaya (7) Mizoram (8) Nagaland (9) Sikkim (10)Tripura (11)Assam (12)Arunachal Pradesh (13)Uttaranchal (14)Jharkhand
4. Genesis of Telangana Merger with Andhra:
Telangana was a part of erstwhile HYDERABAD state which was ruled by Asaf Jahi Dynasty for a period of 224 years from 1724 to 1948 A.D. Hyderabad state was the biggest princely state among 565 princely states of India. It is a fact of history that TELANGANA people were under oppressive rule of the Nizam when India got FREEDOM on 15th August, 1947. Since the Nizam refused to join Indian Union in 1947 the people in HYDERABAD state lived in slavery and serfdom for another 13 months until their liberation by POLICE ACTION launched by Government of India in September, 1948. Whereas the people of Andhra region lived in MADRAS province under the liberal British rule with all the opportunities available to them like English Medium education, employment, industrialization and irrigation projects built by British Engineers. They also gained experience and insight into the working of Political Parties and Democratic Institutions from Village Panchayats to State Legislature. In the circumstances people in Andhra region had become “affluent, educated, enterprising and imbued with political awareness” while people in Telangana remained backward, uneducated and unacquainted with the working of popular institutions and political parties until 1948. It is pertinent to note the following disparities between Andhras and Telangana people.
(a) In Madras Province SUNDAY was Public Holiday for Andhras and English was the official language; and
(b) In Hyderabad state FRIDAY was Public Holiday for Telangana people for more than 200 years and URDU was the official language as well as the Medium of instruction from school level to University level.
In the face of these glaring disparities Telangana region was merged with Andhra state to form “Vishalandhra” in 1956 only to develop Andhra region with the abundant resources of Telangana region.
5. The demand for Andhra state:
It is common knowledge that people of Andhra were in Madras Province for nearly 200 years under British Rule until the 'bifurcation' of Madras in October, 1953. The reasons for their demand for Andhra state were that 'Tamil population' in Madras Province was 66% as against 34% Andhras in the state population. Hence the Tamils dominated in all fields including Legislature, Government, local bodies and state level institutions. In this context Sri. A. Kaleshwar Rao, an eminent leader of Andhra and the First Speaker of Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly vividly described the 'plight' of Andhras in Madras Province in the following terms:
"Tamils have greater influence in the Madras Legislature, in the Government and in the High Court. In the Government of Madras run by the TAMILS, the individuality and self-respect of Andhras has decreased. That is a Tamilian State and not of Andhras. Under the Madras Government, the Tamils are enjoying all the benefits whereas Andhras are backward in respect of employment, education and economic development. Industries and power supply in ANDHRA area".(Autobiography, p-17).
Aggrieved by the injustices done to them by Tamil Rulers, Andhras launched Agitations for many years demanding 'Andhra State' which was finally granted to them in October, 1953 by the Central Government.
The above 'description' of Sri. Kaleshwar Rao, is equally applicable to Telangana people in the state of Andhra Pradesh where they have been a minority with 34% people in the state population in 1956. And the 'injustices' done to them are far more serious than what TAMILS might have done to Andhras when they were in Madras Province. Hence the demand for Telangana state.
6. Creation of Andhra State in 1953:
Andhra State was formed in October, 1953 by bifurcating MADRAS PROVINCE and the capital of Andhra was shifted to KURNOOL then a small town in Andhra region. At that time ANDHRA STATE had only Rs.17.5 crores as its annual budget and a deficit of Rs.5 crores with no other visible resources for development. Added to this they also faced problems in the location of CAPITAL CITY and HIGH COURT with the people in Rayalaseema.
In the above context the observations of S.R.C. in para-376 of the Report merit mention here and they are quoted below:
"376. The existing Andhra State has faced a financial problem of some magnitude ever since it was created; and in comparison with Telangana, the existing Andhra State has a low per capita revenue. Telangana, on the other hand, is much less likely to be faced with financial embarrassment".
Against this background they mooted the idea of VISHALANDHRA in 1955 before the Fazal Ali Commission. But the people of TELANGANA opposed VISHALANDHRA proposal fearing future EXPLOITATION by educated and affluent people from Coastal Andhra before the States Reorganization Commission. In this context THE MISGIVINGS AND APPREHENSIONS expressed by Telangana people against the formation of VISHALANDHRA were succinctly summarized by the S.R.C. on page-105 (para-378) of their REPORT in the following terms.
“One of the principal causes of OPPOSITION of VISHALANDHRA also seems to be the apprehension felt by the educationally BACKWARD PEOPLE of Telangana, was that they may be SWAMPED and EXPLOITED by the more advanced people of Coastal area”.
7. S.R.C. Recommends Separate State:
(i) In the above context and in order to afford better OPPORTUNITIES to Telangana in the matter of EMPLOYMENT and DEVELOPMENT the FAZAL ALI COMMISSION recommended for Separate Statehood for TELANGANA.
(ii) It was an ACCEPTED POLICY of the Central Government to implement the RECOMMENDATION OF THIS HIGH POWER COMMISSION to avoid all controversies. In this connection Sri. Nehru, the then P.M., affirmed this policy in his broadcast speech on 16-1-1956 to the nation, in the following terms:
“The recommendations of such a report (S.R.C) must necessarily be given full weight and accepted”.
8. Origin of Telangana Safeguards:
In order to allay the fears of Telangana people, the then Andhra leaders offered SAFEGUARDS to Telangana people in the matter of Education, services and development. In this connection they got a RESOLUTION passed by the Andhra Legislative Assembly at KURNOOL on 25-11-1955, which reads as under:
Resolution on 25-11-1955 (Annexure-I):
“This Assembly would further like to assure the people in Telangana, that the development of that area would be deemed to be a special charge, and that certain priorities and special protection will be given for the improvement of this area (Telangana Region) such as RESERVATION IN SERVICES AND EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS ON THE BASIS OF POPULATION…….)”.
It is evident from the above RESOLUTION that the reservations with reference to services were ‘unqualified” and without any distinction of SUPERIOR or SUBORDINATE SERVICE. What is also significant is that Andhra leaders and the Government made a categorical commitment that development of Telangana region shall be deemed to be a SPECIAL CHARGE in Andhra Pradesh.
9. To “mollify further” the unabated agitations in Telangana Region against the ‘merger’ with Andhra State, Sri. Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy, the then Deputy Chief Minister of Andhra State, sponsored yet another OFFICIAL RESOLUTION (Annexure-II) in Andhra Assembly on 1-2-1956 reaffirming the commitment of both Government and Legislature made in the First Resolution.
10. It is thus seen that the concept of SAFEGUARDS was conceived and putforth for the ‘first time’ unilaterally by the Andhra leaders and their Government as a PRE-CONDITION for the “formation of Andhra Pradesh” and also as an ‘instrument’ to influence the decision of the Central Government in their favour. However, later events showed that these ‘2 resolutions’ were meant only to ‘nullify’ the effect of S.R.C. recommendation conceding a separate state for Telangana Region.
In this context it may be necessary to know the nature of ‘safeguards’ as mentioned below:
Gentlemen’s Agreement, 1956:
Taking note of the Assurances and Commitment made by Andhra leaders referred to earlier, late. Sri. G.B. Pant, the then Union Home Minister convened a meeting of the Andhra – Telangana leaders in Delhi for talks. During these crucial talks, Telangana leaders were "persuaded to agree" for the merger subject to the ‘guarantees’ with safeguards as a “Pre-Condition for merger”. Thus the merger of Telangana with Andhra state was finalized on the basis of a 14-Point Agreement embodying safeguards to Telangana people. This Agreement was reached on 20-2-1956 which is popularly known as “Gentlemen’s Agreement”.
11. In the above context it is also pertinent to note that Central Government had submitted a NOTE on 10-8-1956 on "Telangana Safeguards" to the Parliament by laying the relevant documents on the 'table' of Lok Sabha as well as Rajya Sabha. In other words the Parliament "approved Telangana Safeguards" as a 'condition precedent' for the merger of Telangana, a backward “B” category state with Andhra State, an advanced “A” category state. In such a situation it was essential and 'incumbent' on the Central Government to 'supervise' the process of implementation of these safeguards by the Andhra Rulers as observed by Fazal-Ali-Commission. But this was not done.
12. As stated above it was a merger of 2 unequal states whose people had no common identity, history or administrative background. For obvious reasons such a ‘merger’ was destined to fail as ‘visualized’ by the
Fazal-Ali Commission, which made a pointed reference to the ‘proposed safeguards’ in paras-383 and 384 of their Report which are cited below (Annexure-IV).
"Para-383. We understand that the leaders of the existing Andhra State may be prepared to provide 'adequate safeguards to protect the interests of Telangana' in the event of its integration in Vishalandhra. These 'safeguards' may take the form of a guarantee (presumably on the lines of Sri Baug Pact between Rayalaseema and coastal Andhra) of opportunities for employment for Telangana in the public services of the new State at least to the extent of one-third, that is to say, roughly 'in the proportion of population', and an assurance that particular attention will be paid to the development plans of this area".
"Para-384. We have carefully gone into the details of the arrangements which may be made on these lines. It seems to us, however, that neither guarantees on the lines of the Sri Baug Pact nor constitutional devices, such as 'Scottish devolution' in the United Kingdom, will prove workable or meet the requirements of Telangana during the period of transition. Anything short of 'supervision' by the Central Government over the measures intended to meet the special needs of Telangana will be found ineffective, and we are not disposed to suggest any such arrangement in regard to Telangana".
This was a 'sound advice' given to the Central Government on the issue of 'safeguards' which ought to have been "Heeded and Accepted" to avoid merger of Telangana with Andhra state. But this had not happened due to the pressure exerted by Andhra Lobby in Delhi. Consequently the observations made by S.R.C. proved 'prophetic' with disastrous consequences to Telangana people as described hereunder.
These developments contributed to the 'mistrust and erosion of confidence' in Andhra Rulers.
13. Regional formula in Telangana:
After rejecting the 'recommendation' of S.R.C. for retaining Telangana region as a SEPARATE STATE, a 'Regional Formula' was devised by the Central Government to safeguard the interests of Telangana people in the enlarged state of Andhra Pradesh. This 'Formula' provided for the constitution of a 'Regional Committee' for Telangana region besides 'other safeguards' in the matter of Government employment, utilization of Telangana Surpluses, reservations in educational institutions and Area Development etc.
For the above purpose, Article-371 of the Constitution was suitably amended to provide "Constitutional Cover" to the contractual safeguards given to the Telangana people.
14. It is evident from the above that 'Regional Formula' for Telangana was evolved as a "New Concept" under the constitution to evolve a compromise and a Condition Precedent for the merger of Telangana with Andhra state. Under this scheme the Telangana Regional Committee was supposed to be a "Watchdog" for the people of Telangana in the matter of implementation of the 'Safeguards'. This Committee was also expected to act as an effective "Channel" for taking decisions on the problems and grievances arising from MALADMINISTRATION and LAPSES in the implementation of SAFEGUARDS from time to time. In this connection the President issued an ORDER on 1-2-1958 constituting the REGIONAL COMMITTEE for Telangana Region. The newly constituted Regional Committee consisted of all the members of the Legislative Assembly elected from Telangana region.
15. Home Minister's Assurance:
Later the Home Minister assured the Parliament about the effective functioning of the Regional Committee. His statement is extracted below:
"In all cases of differences between the Regional Committee and the State Cabinet interse in the case of Telangana and if the difference cannot be solved by themselves interse, then it is open to the GOVERNOR, as the ARBITRATOR to give his decision which will be accepted by both parties. This is the way in which the provision has been made".
But the GOVERNOR never played the ROLE ASSIGNED to him under the 'formula'. As a result the Regional Committee became ineffective in the discharge of the functions assigned to it. Subsequently as a consequence of 1969 Telangana Agitation, Smt. Gandhi, the then Prime Minister enlarged the powers of the Regional Committee under P.M's 8-Point Programme announced on 11-08-1969 in the Parliament.
Simultaneously the Andhra Chief Minister (K. Brahmananda Reddy) was replaced by Sri. P.V. Narsimha Rao, a Congress leader from Telangana. But these measures were NOT liked by Congress leaders from Andhra. As a result they launched "Jai Andhra" agitation in 1973 demanding bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh. This Agitation lasted for about 11 months during 1973 in which Andhra Ministers, M.L.As and M.Ps participated.
Consequently 'President Rule' was imposed in the state after the resignation of the P.V. Narsimha Rao, the First C.M. from Telangana region. He was C.M. for less than 2 years only. And once again a new Formula by name 6-Point Formula was adopted in place of Mulki Rules and Regional Development Board in place of "Telangana Regional Committee". In other words whatever "gains" were made after 1969 Telangana Agitation were lost after "JAI ANDHRA" Agitation in 1973 including original Mulki Rules as well as Regional Committee. As in the past even the 6-Point Formula was also violated resulting in continuance of thousands of employees in Telangana region.
16. Other Safeguards:
The other important safeguards are described below:
(i) MULKI Rules.
(ii) Telangana Surpluses.
(iii) Office of Deputy Chief Minister from Telangana when C.M. is from Andhra.
(iv) Continuance of Hyderabad Pradesh Congress for Telangana Region.
(v) The New State to be named as Andhra Telangana State.
(vi) Prohibition on alienation of Agril. lands in Telangana to outsiders without the permission of concerned Collectors. The salient features of these safeguards are noted below:
(i) Mulki Rules:
The Mulki Rules were enacted in 1921 in Hyderabad state when Syed Ali Imam was the Prime Minister. The Rules required 15 years residence in Hyderabad for any person to secure a Government job. These Rules were enforced to prevent migrants from North India from getting jobs. These Rules continued until 1956 and thereafter. These Rules were valid Rules under Art-35(b) of the Constitution as declared by the Supreme Court in October, 1972.
As a result of these Rules only Telangana natives were eligible to get jobs both gazetted and non-gazetted in Telangana region. The Andhras wanted these Rules to go as they were not eligible to get jobs in Telangana. Consequently the Andhra Rulers repealed these Mulki Rules which fully protected the Rights of Telangana people in Government jobs.
The Mulki Rules were considered as the bedrock of safeguards and as such their repeal had disastrous effect on Telangana people in the field of Government service.
(ii) Telangana Surpluses:
Telangana had "Surplus Revenues" at the time of its merger with Andhra State and this was also recognized by Fazal Ali Commission in their Report. But these surpluses were diverted to Andhra region year after year in violation of safeguards. For this reason a High Powered Committee headed by Justice Bhargava, a judge of the Supreme Court was appointed in 1969 to examine these surpluses. This Committee determined the Telangana surpluses which were diverted to Andhra region. The Committee also laid down the principles regarding allocation of funds in the annual budget from which receipts and expenditure of Telangana in the Annual Budget could easily be known. But this is not being followed. As a result thousands of crores have been diverted to Andhra region year after year. Even today Telangana contributes some 65% of the Revenues to the Budget which has to be spent in Telangana region but this is not being followed. So this is another "violation of an important safeguard".
(iii) Deputy C.M. for Telangana:
This assurance was violated by the Andhra C.M. Sri. N. Sanjeeva Reddy who was the first C.M. of A.P. He has not given this post to any leader from Telangana. This was the first violation committed from the very first day of the formation of new state. The same practice continues until this day. This is another violation.
(iv) Hyderabad Pradesh Congress Committee:
Hyderabad Pradesh Congress Committee was to continue under safeguards. But it was dissolved long back by Andhra leaders as they wanted to curb potential party leaders in Telangana from becoming political personalities.
THUS, IT IS THE FIRST VIOLATION OF SAFEGUARDS COMMITTED BY ANDHRA LEADERS.
(vi) Prohibition on sale of Agriculture lands in Telangana to outsiders:
In 1956 the 'Hyderabad laws' prohibited sale of Agriculture lands to outsiders without the permission of the concerned Collector. Due to this Andhra Migrants could not purchase lands in Telangana for many years. Later this law was repealed by Andhra Rulers. As a result "Flood Gates were opened" for the sale of lands to Andhra migrants who came in large numbers year after year to Telangana area.
17. Smt. Yeshoda Reddy, M.P's remarks:
In the above context the 'observations' of a Congress M.P. Smt. Yeshoda Reddy from Kadapa deserve special mention. She expressed her views in a Congress Parliamentary Party meeting that Telangana people were subjected to "3-Actions" over the years. These 3 Actions are:
(i) Police Action in 1948.
(ii) Andhra Officers Action after 1948.
(iii) Political Leaders Action.
i) Police Action in 1948:
This was launched by the 'initiative' of Sardar Patel for the liberation of people in Hyderabad whose RULER had not joined India till September, 1948.
ii) Andhra Officers Action after 1948:
The second was the action by the officials of the Andhra region of the erstwhile Madras state, who came after the police action in 1948 to take over the civil administration and started casting the shadows of the coming events. Their UNJUST ACTIONS and help to Andhra migrants in getting jobs led to non-Mulki Agitation in 1952 which was against the infiltration of non-Mulkis in the administration of Hyderabad.
iii) Political Leaders Action:
The shrewd politicians of Andhra region never allowed the leaders in Telangana to get important positions in political parties as they were all controlled by Andhra Leaders. On the other hand they adopted policies of 'divide and rule' the leaders and cadres in Telangana parties and thereby make them their followers. In this way the 'Telangana political personality' was totally suppressed in different parties for obvious reasons.
18. Telangana Chief Ministers:
a) It is strange but true that since the inception of A.P. in 1956 leaders of Telangana held the office of C.M. for just 11 years only while leaders from other regions held for much longer periods as shown below:
(i) C.Ms from Rayalaseema - 23 years
(ii) C.Ms from Coastal Andhra - 20 years
b) What is astonishing to know is that Rayalaseema with only 4 districts and 17.67 population of the state secured the post of C.M. for 23 years at the cost of Telangana. This is yet another glaring discrimination shown to Telangana leaders.
c) It is also pertinent to note that Telangana C.Ms held this office for less than 2 years including Sri. P.V. Narsimha Rao who held this office for less than 1 ½ years. This is sufficient proof that Andhra leaders with their majority in the Legislature as well as Government have acted against the interests of Telangana people.
19. Central Government Inaction on Complaints:
In the above context numerous and persistent COMPLAINTS were made to Central Government by the public representatives of Telangana, but NO remedial measures were taken by the Central Government.
In 1992 all the M.Ps and M.L.As elected from TELANGANA submitted MEMORANDUMS to the Prime Minister with all details of VIOLATIONS of SAFEGUARDS and INJUSTICES done to Telangana People. But no action has been taken on these representations until now. This is indeed a very shocking state of affairs in dealing with Telangana GRIEVANCES.
21. Home Ministry Press Communiqué (Annexure-XII):
In the aftermath of “Telangana Agitation in 1969” the Home Ministry issued a 5-page Press Communiqué on 18-2-1970. This communiqué refers to various decisions taken by the Government of India with regard to several measures to ensure utilization of Telangana Surplus Revenues in Telangana only and many other steps for the development of Telangana. But none of these decisions were implemented by the State Government from 1971 onwards as directed by the Central Government. This is yet another proof of blatant violations committed by Andhra Rulers with regard to various safeguards provided to Telangana people from time to time.
22. Prime Minister Nehru's Assurances:
Prime Minister Nehru knew that TELANGANA people were OPPOSED to merger with Andhra. In this context he made some profound observations on two occasions in 1956 as described below:
(i) Nizamabad Announcement on 5th March, 1955:
Sri. Nehru announced the decision of FORMATION of Andhra Pradesh in Nizamabad district on 5th March, 1956. In his speech in a public meeting he made a pointed reference to MERGER of Telangana against the recommendations of S.R.C. and clarified that:
"if the Telangana people suffer injustices at the hands of Andhras then they will have a right to seek SEPARATION".
23. Hyderabad Declaration on 1-11-1956:
a) Sri. Nehru declared in Hyderabad on 1st November, 1956 that:
"Andhra people are on TRIAL and the UNITY of the new state depends on how fairly they treat people of Telangana".
It is thus seen that merger of Telangana with Andhra was conditional and subject to implementation of safeguards and guarantees. Since 'the safeguards and guarantees were flouted by Andhra Rulers separation is the only way as assured by India's First Prime Minister, Pandit Nehru'.
b) Unrest among Telangana people:
We are, therefore, convinced that maintenance of status quo will cause further unrest among the people of Telangana as is being witnessed now. Past experience has shown that NEGLECT AND LAPSES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SAFEGUARDS HAVE LED TO PUBLIC UNREST, INTERNAL DISORDER, agitations and counter agitations. Killings and Bloodshed.
In view of the above circumstances we DEMAND that Government of India may be pleased to take IMMEDIATE ACTION for the FORMATION OF TELANGANA STATE by bifurcating Andhra Pradesh without further delay to save 35 million people of TELANGANA from further exploitation and colonization. We may take this opportunity to assure you that Telangana state will be a ROLE MODEL for the backward and neglected regions in the country.
Dated: 2-1-2010,
Hyderabad.
Yours signatories.
(M. Narayan Reddy)
Encls: Annexures-12 nos. Ex-M.P.
Chairman,
Voice of Telangana.
Flat # 501, Shanti Saudha Apartments, Erramanzill Colony Hyderabad – 50008
Home Minister,
Govt. of India,New Delhi.
Respected Home Minister,
Sub: Need for formation of Telangana State.
Memorandum
The Chairman, ‘Voice of Telangana’ Hyderabad hereby submit this Memorandum on the issue of formation of Telangana state by bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh.
2. At the outset we convey our sincere thanks to you for holding a meeting of 8 Political parties of Andhra Pradesh on 5th January, 2010 to consider the issues underlying the demand for Telangana state. In this context we take this opportunity to put-forth our ‘demand’ for the formation of Telangana state by ‘bifurcation’ of Andhra Pradesh. In this connection we request you to kindly consider the facts and issues stated hereunder in support of our demand for ‘Telangana state’.
3. Telangana has 10 districts and about 4 crores people who constitute 41% of the total population of Andhra Pradesh. Its geographical area is 1.5 lakhs sq. km which is 42% of the total area of the state. Besides, Hyderabad, the 5th largest city in India, is a part of Telangana region. Another notable feature is that Telangana region is larger than FOURTEEN STATES in the country as described below:
(1) Haryana (2) Punjab (3) Himachal Pradesh (4) Goa (5) Manipur (6) Meghalaya (7) Mizoram (8) Nagaland (9) Sikkim (10)Tripura (11)Assam (12)Arunachal Pradesh (13)Uttaranchal (14)Jharkhand
4. Genesis of Telangana Merger with Andhra:
Telangana was a part of erstwhile HYDERABAD state which was ruled by Asaf Jahi Dynasty for a period of 224 years from 1724 to 1948 A.D. Hyderabad state was the biggest princely state among 565 princely states of India. It is a fact of history that TELANGANA people were under oppressive rule of the Nizam when India got FREEDOM on 15th August, 1947. Since the Nizam refused to join Indian Union in 1947 the people in HYDERABAD state lived in slavery and serfdom for another 13 months until their liberation by POLICE ACTION launched by Government of India in September, 1948. Whereas the people of Andhra region lived in MADRAS province under the liberal British rule with all the opportunities available to them like English Medium education, employment, industrialization and irrigation projects built by British Engineers. They also gained experience and insight into the working of Political Parties and Democratic Institutions from Village Panchayats to State Legislature. In the circumstances people in Andhra region had become “affluent, educated, enterprising and imbued with political awareness” while people in Telangana remained backward, uneducated and unacquainted with the working of popular institutions and political parties until 1948. It is pertinent to note the following disparities between Andhras and Telangana people.
(a) In Madras Province SUNDAY was Public Holiday for Andhras and English was the official language; and
(b) In Hyderabad state FRIDAY was Public Holiday for Telangana people for more than 200 years and URDU was the official language as well as the Medium of instruction from school level to University level.
In the face of these glaring disparities Telangana region was merged with Andhra state to form “Vishalandhra” in 1956 only to develop Andhra region with the abundant resources of Telangana region.
5. The demand for Andhra state:
It is common knowledge that people of Andhra were in Madras Province for nearly 200 years under British Rule until the 'bifurcation' of Madras in October, 1953. The reasons for their demand for Andhra state were that 'Tamil population' in Madras Province was 66% as against 34% Andhras in the state population. Hence the Tamils dominated in all fields including Legislature, Government, local bodies and state level institutions. In this context Sri. A. Kaleshwar Rao, an eminent leader of Andhra and the First Speaker of Andhra Pradesh Legislative Assembly vividly described the 'plight' of Andhras in Madras Province in the following terms:
"Tamils have greater influence in the Madras Legislature, in the Government and in the High Court. In the Government of Madras run by the TAMILS, the individuality and self-respect of Andhras has decreased. That is a Tamilian State and not of Andhras. Under the Madras Government, the Tamils are enjoying all the benefits whereas Andhras are backward in respect of employment, education and economic development. Industries and power supply in ANDHRA area".(Autobiography, p-17).
Aggrieved by the injustices done to them by Tamil Rulers, Andhras launched Agitations for many years demanding 'Andhra State' which was finally granted to them in October, 1953 by the Central Government.
The above 'description' of Sri. Kaleshwar Rao, is equally applicable to Telangana people in the state of Andhra Pradesh where they have been a minority with 34% people in the state population in 1956. And the 'injustices' done to them are far more serious than what TAMILS might have done to Andhras when they were in Madras Province. Hence the demand for Telangana state.
6. Creation of Andhra State in 1953:
Andhra State was formed in October, 1953 by bifurcating MADRAS PROVINCE and the capital of Andhra was shifted to KURNOOL then a small town in Andhra region. At that time ANDHRA STATE had only Rs.17.5 crores as its annual budget and a deficit of Rs.5 crores with no other visible resources for development. Added to this they also faced problems in the location of CAPITAL CITY and HIGH COURT with the people in Rayalaseema.
In the above context the observations of S.R.C. in para-376 of the Report merit mention here and they are quoted below:
"376. The existing Andhra State has faced a financial problem of some magnitude ever since it was created; and in comparison with Telangana, the existing Andhra State has a low per capita revenue. Telangana, on the other hand, is much less likely to be faced with financial embarrassment".
Against this background they mooted the idea of VISHALANDHRA in 1955 before the Fazal Ali Commission. But the people of TELANGANA opposed VISHALANDHRA proposal fearing future EXPLOITATION by educated and affluent people from Coastal Andhra before the States Reorganization Commission. In this context THE MISGIVINGS AND APPREHENSIONS expressed by Telangana people against the formation of VISHALANDHRA were succinctly summarized by the S.R.C. on page-105 (para-378) of their REPORT in the following terms.
“One of the principal causes of OPPOSITION of VISHALANDHRA also seems to be the apprehension felt by the educationally BACKWARD PEOPLE of Telangana, was that they may be SWAMPED and EXPLOITED by the more advanced people of Coastal area”.
7. S.R.C. Recommends Separate State:
(i) In the above context and in order to afford better OPPORTUNITIES to Telangana in the matter of EMPLOYMENT and DEVELOPMENT the FAZAL ALI COMMISSION recommended for Separate Statehood for TELANGANA.
(ii) It was an ACCEPTED POLICY of the Central Government to implement the RECOMMENDATION OF THIS HIGH POWER COMMISSION to avoid all controversies. In this connection Sri. Nehru, the then P.M., affirmed this policy in his broadcast speech on 16-1-1956 to the nation, in the following terms:
“The recommendations of such a report (S.R.C) must necessarily be given full weight and accepted”.
8. Origin of Telangana Safeguards:
In order to allay the fears of Telangana people, the then Andhra leaders offered SAFEGUARDS to Telangana people in the matter of Education, services and development. In this connection they got a RESOLUTION passed by the Andhra Legislative Assembly at KURNOOL on 25-11-1955, which reads as under:
Resolution on 25-11-1955 (Annexure-I):
“This Assembly would further like to assure the people in Telangana, that the development of that area would be deemed to be a special charge, and that certain priorities and special protection will be given for the improvement of this area (Telangana Region) such as RESERVATION IN SERVICES AND EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS ON THE BASIS OF POPULATION…….)”.
It is evident from the above RESOLUTION that the reservations with reference to services were ‘unqualified” and without any distinction of SUPERIOR or SUBORDINATE SERVICE. What is also significant is that Andhra leaders and the Government made a categorical commitment that development of Telangana region shall be deemed to be a SPECIAL CHARGE in Andhra Pradesh.
9. To “mollify further” the unabated agitations in Telangana Region against the ‘merger’ with Andhra State, Sri. Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy, the then Deputy Chief Minister of Andhra State, sponsored yet another OFFICIAL RESOLUTION (Annexure-II) in Andhra Assembly on 1-2-1956 reaffirming the commitment of both Government and Legislature made in the First Resolution.
10. It is thus seen that the concept of SAFEGUARDS was conceived and putforth for the ‘first time’ unilaterally by the Andhra leaders and their Government as a PRE-CONDITION for the “formation of Andhra Pradesh” and also as an ‘instrument’ to influence the decision of the Central Government in their favour. However, later events showed that these ‘2 resolutions’ were meant only to ‘nullify’ the effect of S.R.C. recommendation conceding a separate state for Telangana Region.
In this context it may be necessary to know the nature of ‘safeguards’ as mentioned below:
Gentlemen’s Agreement, 1956:
Taking note of the Assurances and Commitment made by Andhra leaders referred to earlier, late. Sri. G.B. Pant, the then Union Home Minister convened a meeting of the Andhra – Telangana leaders in Delhi for talks. During these crucial talks, Telangana leaders were "persuaded to agree" for the merger subject to the ‘guarantees’ with safeguards as a “Pre-Condition for merger”. Thus the merger of Telangana with Andhra state was finalized on the basis of a 14-Point Agreement embodying safeguards to Telangana people. This Agreement was reached on 20-2-1956 which is popularly known as “Gentlemen’s Agreement”.
11. In the above context it is also pertinent to note that Central Government had submitted a NOTE on 10-8-1956 on "Telangana Safeguards" to the Parliament by laying the relevant documents on the 'table' of Lok Sabha as well as Rajya Sabha. In other words the Parliament "approved Telangana Safeguards" as a 'condition precedent' for the merger of Telangana, a backward “B” category state with Andhra State, an advanced “A” category state. In such a situation it was essential and 'incumbent' on the Central Government to 'supervise' the process of implementation of these safeguards by the Andhra Rulers as observed by Fazal-Ali-Commission. But this was not done.
12. As stated above it was a merger of 2 unequal states whose people had no common identity, history or administrative background. For obvious reasons such a ‘merger’ was destined to fail as ‘visualized’ by the
Fazal-Ali Commission, which made a pointed reference to the ‘proposed safeguards’ in paras-383 and 384 of their Report which are cited below (Annexure-IV).
"Para-383. We understand that the leaders of the existing Andhra State may be prepared to provide 'adequate safeguards to protect the interests of Telangana' in the event of its integration in Vishalandhra. These 'safeguards' may take the form of a guarantee (presumably on the lines of Sri Baug Pact between Rayalaseema and coastal Andhra) of opportunities for employment for Telangana in the public services of the new State at least to the extent of one-third, that is to say, roughly 'in the proportion of population', and an assurance that particular attention will be paid to the development plans of this area".
"Para-384. We have carefully gone into the details of the arrangements which may be made on these lines. It seems to us, however, that neither guarantees on the lines of the Sri Baug Pact nor constitutional devices, such as 'Scottish devolution' in the United Kingdom, will prove workable or meet the requirements of Telangana during the period of transition. Anything short of 'supervision' by the Central Government over the measures intended to meet the special needs of Telangana will be found ineffective, and we are not disposed to suggest any such arrangement in regard to Telangana".
This was a 'sound advice' given to the Central Government on the issue of 'safeguards' which ought to have been "Heeded and Accepted" to avoid merger of Telangana with Andhra state. But this had not happened due to the pressure exerted by Andhra Lobby in Delhi. Consequently the observations made by S.R.C. proved 'prophetic' with disastrous consequences to Telangana people as described hereunder.
These developments contributed to the 'mistrust and erosion of confidence' in Andhra Rulers.
13. Regional formula in Telangana:
After rejecting the 'recommendation' of S.R.C. for retaining Telangana region as a SEPARATE STATE, a 'Regional Formula' was devised by the Central Government to safeguard the interests of Telangana people in the enlarged state of Andhra Pradesh. This 'Formula' provided for the constitution of a 'Regional Committee' for Telangana region besides 'other safeguards' in the matter of Government employment, utilization of Telangana Surpluses, reservations in educational institutions and Area Development etc.
For the above purpose, Article-371 of the Constitution was suitably amended to provide "Constitutional Cover" to the contractual safeguards given to the Telangana people.
14. It is evident from the above that 'Regional Formula' for Telangana was evolved as a "New Concept" under the constitution to evolve a compromise and a Condition Precedent for the merger of Telangana with Andhra state. Under this scheme the Telangana Regional Committee was supposed to be a "Watchdog" for the people of Telangana in the matter of implementation of the 'Safeguards'. This Committee was also expected to act as an effective "Channel" for taking decisions on the problems and grievances arising from MALADMINISTRATION and LAPSES in the implementation of SAFEGUARDS from time to time. In this connection the President issued an ORDER on 1-2-1958 constituting the REGIONAL COMMITTEE for Telangana Region. The newly constituted Regional Committee consisted of all the members of the Legislative Assembly elected from Telangana region.
15. Home Minister's Assurance:
Later the Home Minister assured the Parliament about the effective functioning of the Regional Committee. His statement is extracted below:
"In all cases of differences between the Regional Committee and the State Cabinet interse in the case of Telangana and if the difference cannot be solved by themselves interse, then it is open to the GOVERNOR, as the ARBITRATOR to give his decision which will be accepted by both parties. This is the way in which the provision has been made".
But the GOVERNOR never played the ROLE ASSIGNED to him under the 'formula'. As a result the Regional Committee became ineffective in the discharge of the functions assigned to it. Subsequently as a consequence of 1969 Telangana Agitation, Smt. Gandhi, the then Prime Minister enlarged the powers of the Regional Committee under P.M's 8-Point Programme announced on 11-08-1969 in the Parliament.
Simultaneously the Andhra Chief Minister (K. Brahmananda Reddy) was replaced by Sri. P.V. Narsimha Rao, a Congress leader from Telangana. But these measures were NOT liked by Congress leaders from Andhra. As a result they launched "Jai Andhra" agitation in 1973 demanding bifurcation of Andhra Pradesh. This Agitation lasted for about 11 months during 1973 in which Andhra Ministers, M.L.As and M.Ps participated.
Consequently 'President Rule' was imposed in the state after the resignation of the P.V. Narsimha Rao, the First C.M. from Telangana region. He was C.M. for less than 2 years only. And once again a new Formula by name 6-Point Formula was adopted in place of Mulki Rules and Regional Development Board in place of "Telangana Regional Committee". In other words whatever "gains" were made after 1969 Telangana Agitation were lost after "JAI ANDHRA" Agitation in 1973 including original Mulki Rules as well as Regional Committee. As in the past even the 6-Point Formula was also violated resulting in continuance of thousands of employees in Telangana region.
16. Other Safeguards:
The other important safeguards are described below:
(i) MULKI Rules.
(ii) Telangana Surpluses.
(iii) Office of Deputy Chief Minister from Telangana when C.M. is from Andhra.
(iv) Continuance of Hyderabad Pradesh Congress for Telangana Region.
(v) The New State to be named as Andhra Telangana State.
(vi) Prohibition on alienation of Agril. lands in Telangana to outsiders without the permission of concerned Collectors. The salient features of these safeguards are noted below:
(i) Mulki Rules:
The Mulki Rules were enacted in 1921 in Hyderabad state when Syed Ali Imam was the Prime Minister. The Rules required 15 years residence in Hyderabad for any person to secure a Government job. These Rules were enforced to prevent migrants from North India from getting jobs. These Rules continued until 1956 and thereafter. These Rules were valid Rules under Art-35(b) of the Constitution as declared by the Supreme Court in October, 1972.
As a result of these Rules only Telangana natives were eligible to get jobs both gazetted and non-gazetted in Telangana region. The Andhras wanted these Rules to go as they were not eligible to get jobs in Telangana. Consequently the Andhra Rulers repealed these Mulki Rules which fully protected the Rights of Telangana people in Government jobs.
The Mulki Rules were considered as the bedrock of safeguards and as such their repeal had disastrous effect on Telangana people in the field of Government service.
(ii) Telangana Surpluses:
Telangana had "Surplus Revenues" at the time of its merger with Andhra State and this was also recognized by Fazal Ali Commission in their Report. But these surpluses were diverted to Andhra region year after year in violation of safeguards. For this reason a High Powered Committee headed by Justice Bhargava, a judge of the Supreme Court was appointed in 1969 to examine these surpluses. This Committee determined the Telangana surpluses which were diverted to Andhra region. The Committee also laid down the principles regarding allocation of funds in the annual budget from which receipts and expenditure of Telangana in the Annual Budget could easily be known. But this is not being followed. As a result thousands of crores have been diverted to Andhra region year after year. Even today Telangana contributes some 65% of the Revenues to the Budget which has to be spent in Telangana region but this is not being followed. So this is another "violation of an important safeguard".
(iii) Deputy C.M. for Telangana:
This assurance was violated by the Andhra C.M. Sri. N. Sanjeeva Reddy who was the first C.M. of A.P. He has not given this post to any leader from Telangana. This was the first violation committed from the very first day of the formation of new state. The same practice continues until this day. This is another violation.
(iv) Hyderabad Pradesh Congress Committee:
Hyderabad Pradesh Congress Committee was to continue under safeguards. But it was dissolved long back by Andhra leaders as they wanted to curb potential party leaders in Telangana from becoming political personalities.
THUS, IT IS THE FIRST VIOLATION OF SAFEGUARDS COMMITTED BY ANDHRA LEADERS.
(vi) Prohibition on sale of Agriculture lands in Telangana to outsiders:
In 1956 the 'Hyderabad laws' prohibited sale of Agriculture lands to outsiders without the permission of the concerned Collector. Due to this Andhra Migrants could not purchase lands in Telangana for many years. Later this law was repealed by Andhra Rulers. As a result "Flood Gates were opened" for the sale of lands to Andhra migrants who came in large numbers year after year to Telangana area.
17. Smt. Yeshoda Reddy, M.P's remarks:
In the above context the 'observations' of a Congress M.P. Smt. Yeshoda Reddy from Kadapa deserve special mention. She expressed her views in a Congress Parliamentary Party meeting that Telangana people were subjected to "3-Actions" over the years. These 3 Actions are:
(i) Police Action in 1948.
(ii) Andhra Officers Action after 1948.
(iii) Political Leaders Action.
i) Police Action in 1948:
This was launched by the 'initiative' of Sardar Patel for the liberation of people in Hyderabad whose RULER had not joined India till September, 1948.
ii) Andhra Officers Action after 1948:
The second was the action by the officials of the Andhra region of the erstwhile Madras state, who came after the police action in 1948 to take over the civil administration and started casting the shadows of the coming events. Their UNJUST ACTIONS and help to Andhra migrants in getting jobs led to non-Mulki Agitation in 1952 which was against the infiltration of non-Mulkis in the administration of Hyderabad.
iii) Political Leaders Action:
The shrewd politicians of Andhra region never allowed the leaders in Telangana to get important positions in political parties as they were all controlled by Andhra Leaders. On the other hand they adopted policies of 'divide and rule' the leaders and cadres in Telangana parties and thereby make them their followers. In this way the 'Telangana political personality' was totally suppressed in different parties for obvious reasons.
18. Telangana Chief Ministers:
a) It is strange but true that since the inception of A.P. in 1956 leaders of Telangana held the office of C.M. for just 11 years only while leaders from other regions held for much longer periods as shown below:
(i) C.Ms from Rayalaseema - 23 years
(ii) C.Ms from Coastal Andhra - 20 years
b) What is astonishing to know is that Rayalaseema with only 4 districts and 17.67 population of the state secured the post of C.M. for 23 years at the cost of Telangana. This is yet another glaring discrimination shown to Telangana leaders.
c) It is also pertinent to note that Telangana C.Ms held this office for less than 2 years including Sri. P.V. Narsimha Rao who held this office for less than 1 ½ years. This is sufficient proof that Andhra leaders with their majority in the Legislature as well as Government have acted against the interests of Telangana people.
19. Central Government Inaction on Complaints:
In the above context numerous and persistent COMPLAINTS were made to Central Government by the public representatives of Telangana, but NO remedial measures were taken by the Central Government.
In 1992 all the M.Ps and M.L.As elected from TELANGANA submitted MEMORANDUMS to the Prime Minister with all details of VIOLATIONS of SAFEGUARDS and INJUSTICES done to Telangana People. But no action has been taken on these representations until now. This is indeed a very shocking state of affairs in dealing with Telangana GRIEVANCES.
21. Home Ministry Press Communiqué (Annexure-XII):
In the aftermath of “Telangana Agitation in 1969” the Home Ministry issued a 5-page Press Communiqué on 18-2-1970. This communiqué refers to various decisions taken by the Government of India with regard to several measures to ensure utilization of Telangana Surplus Revenues in Telangana only and many other steps for the development of Telangana. But none of these decisions were implemented by the State Government from 1971 onwards as directed by the Central Government. This is yet another proof of blatant violations committed by Andhra Rulers with regard to various safeguards provided to Telangana people from time to time.
22. Prime Minister Nehru's Assurances:
Prime Minister Nehru knew that TELANGANA people were OPPOSED to merger with Andhra. In this context he made some profound observations on two occasions in 1956 as described below:
(i) Nizamabad Announcement on 5th March, 1955:
Sri. Nehru announced the decision of FORMATION of Andhra Pradesh in Nizamabad district on 5th March, 1956. In his speech in a public meeting he made a pointed reference to MERGER of Telangana against the recommendations of S.R.C. and clarified that:
"if the Telangana people suffer injustices at the hands of Andhras then they will have a right to seek SEPARATION".
23. Hyderabad Declaration on 1-11-1956:
a) Sri. Nehru declared in Hyderabad on 1st November, 1956 that:
"Andhra people are on TRIAL and the UNITY of the new state depends on how fairly they treat people of Telangana".
It is thus seen that merger of Telangana with Andhra was conditional and subject to implementation of safeguards and guarantees. Since 'the safeguards and guarantees were flouted by Andhra Rulers separation is the only way as assured by India's First Prime Minister, Pandit Nehru'.
b) Unrest among Telangana people:
We are, therefore, convinced that maintenance of status quo will cause further unrest among the people of Telangana as is being witnessed now. Past experience has shown that NEGLECT AND LAPSES IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SAFEGUARDS HAVE LED TO PUBLIC UNREST, INTERNAL DISORDER, agitations and counter agitations. Killings and Bloodshed.
In view of the above circumstances we DEMAND that Government of India may be pleased to take IMMEDIATE ACTION for the FORMATION OF TELANGANA STATE by bifurcating Andhra Pradesh without further delay to save 35 million people of TELANGANA from further exploitation and colonization. We may take this opportunity to assure you that Telangana state will be a ROLE MODEL for the backward and neglected regions in the country.
Dated: 2-1-2010,
Hyderabad.
Yours signatories.
(M. Narayan Reddy)
Encls: Annexures-12 nos. Ex-M.P.
Chairman,
Voice of Telangana.
Flat # 501, Shanti Saudha Apartments, Erramanzill Colony Hyderabad – 50008
committee on Telangana-Request
Date: 30-01-2010
Sri. P. Chidambaram,
Union Home Minister,
Govt. of India,
New Delhi.
Sub: Proposed ‘Committee’ for Telangana State – Reg.
We appreciate your concern on the issue of Telangana State. In this connection I refer to your recent statement on constitution of a ‘committee and its terms of reference’.
2. In the above context you may kindly recall the constitution of a similar committee in December, 1952 by the Central Government when a decision was taken for the formation of Andhra State by bifurcating Madras Province. This ‘committee’ was headed by Justice K.N. Wanchoo, the then Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court. This committee was given very ‘clear terms’ as described below. It was asked to submit the Report in ‘one month’ beginning from 1st January, 1953. Justice Wanchoo was designated as “Officer on Special Duty” at that time.
Terms of reference:
“Chief Justice, Wanchoo will set out, consider and report on the financial and other implications of this division and the various questions which will arise in the course of implementing the decision of the Government of India more particularly by reason of the non-inclusion of the city of Madras in the Andhra State. For the consideration of the whole problem he will receive representations from such individuals, groups, organizations and parties as he may think fit and hear their representatives, if they desire to be heard. He may, if he so chooses, tour in different parts of the Telugu speaking districts if he considers that it will facilitate the execution of the task entrusted to him. He will submit his report by the 31st of January, 1953”.
3. It is seen from the above that this High Power Committee was given a clear ‘mandate’ to consider and report on the financial and other implications of the division of the Madras Province and other allied matters.
It is also clear from the above terms that the “demand for Madras city as the capital of Andhra state” has been excluded from the consideration of the committee.
4. This committee submitted its report on 7th February, 1953 within one month from taking charge of the office. In other words the committee did excellent job in submitting the Report in “one month” as stipulated in the “Terms of Reference”.
Hence “similar procedure” requires to be adopted by the Central Government with respect to the present committee. In the instant case the task of the committee is rather short and simple as it has to deal with the following subjects only.
1. Financial implications of the division’
2. Services matters;
3. Irrigation projects on Godavari, Krishna and Tungabadhra rivers; and
4. Division of Assets and Liabilities.
In the circumstances a clear ‘mandate’ requires to be given to the committee with regard to ‘terms’ as well as ‘timeframe’ for the submission of the report. Any “deviation or departure” from the procedure adopted in 1953 for the division of Madras Province will give rise to needless and justifiable controversies resulting in further turmoil in the region.
M. Narayan Reddy, Ex-M.P.,
5-5-80, Khalilwadi,
Nizamabad (A.P)
Tel: 08462-222877
Cell: 99480 22877
Sri. P. Chidambaram,
Union Home Minister,
Govt. of India,
New Delhi.
Sub: Proposed ‘Committee’ for Telangana State – Reg.
We appreciate your concern on the issue of Telangana State. In this connection I refer to your recent statement on constitution of a ‘committee and its terms of reference’.
2. In the above context you may kindly recall the constitution of a similar committee in December, 1952 by the Central Government when a decision was taken for the formation of Andhra State by bifurcating Madras Province. This ‘committee’ was headed by Justice K.N. Wanchoo, the then Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court. This committee was given very ‘clear terms’ as described below. It was asked to submit the Report in ‘one month’ beginning from 1st January, 1953. Justice Wanchoo was designated as “Officer on Special Duty” at that time.
Terms of reference:
“Chief Justice, Wanchoo will set out, consider and report on the financial and other implications of this division and the various questions which will arise in the course of implementing the decision of the Government of India more particularly by reason of the non-inclusion of the city of Madras in the Andhra State. For the consideration of the whole problem he will receive representations from such individuals, groups, organizations and parties as he may think fit and hear their representatives, if they desire to be heard. He may, if he so chooses, tour in different parts of the Telugu speaking districts if he considers that it will facilitate the execution of the task entrusted to him. He will submit his report by the 31st of January, 1953”.
3. It is seen from the above that this High Power Committee was given a clear ‘mandate’ to consider and report on the financial and other implications of the division of the Madras Province and other allied matters.
It is also clear from the above terms that the “demand for Madras city as the capital of Andhra state” has been excluded from the consideration of the committee.
4. This committee submitted its report on 7th February, 1953 within one month from taking charge of the office. In other words the committee did excellent job in submitting the Report in “one month” as stipulated in the “Terms of Reference”.
Hence “similar procedure” requires to be adopted by the Central Government with respect to the present committee. In the instant case the task of the committee is rather short and simple as it has to deal with the following subjects only.
1. Financial implications of the division’
2. Services matters;
3. Irrigation projects on Godavari, Krishna and Tungabadhra rivers; and
4. Division of Assets and Liabilities.
In the circumstances a clear ‘mandate’ requires to be given to the committee with regard to ‘terms’ as well as ‘timeframe’ for the submission of the report. Any “deviation or departure” from the procedure adopted in 1953 for the division of Madras Province will give rise to needless and justifiable controversies resulting in further turmoil in the region.
M. Narayan Reddy, Ex-M.P.,
5-5-80, Khalilwadi,
Nizamabad (A.P)
Tel: 08462-222877
Cell: 99480 22877
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)